Free vs. pay versions (Re: Oracle Sues Google Over Android)

[jarod-ajLrJawYSntWk0Htik3J/w at public.gmane.org (Jarod Wilson)]

On Sun, Aug 22, 2010 at 9:01 PM, Edward Ned Harvey <blu-Z8efaSeK1ezqlBn2x/YWAg at public.gmane.org> wrote:
>> From: discuss-bounces-mNDKBlG2WHs at public.gmane.org [mailto:discuss-bounces-mNDKBlG2WHs at public.gmane.org] On
>> Behalf Of Jarod Wilson
>>
>> I'm sorry, but I still don't buy that it was Red Hat shipping
>> something CentOS can't. Its entirely possible CentOS built some
>
> Fine. ?Believe whatever you want.

What I believe is that I know Red Hat and its package distribution
policies. Quite intimately. Vague recollections about not being able
to get something to work a few years ago are hardly persuasive. Like I
said elsewhere in this thread, show me a package in the RHEL
distribution discs that isn't open source (or
binary-but-redistributable firmware), and I'll cheerfully admit I'm
wrong (and go bludgeon someone internally at Red Hat). I don't doubt
that you couldn't get something to work, nor do I contend that RHEL
and CentOS are 100% the same, and its possible that the CentOS folks
screwed up a build, but the assertion that you couldn't get something
to work on CentOS because of some binary-only library Red Hat ships
that CentOS can't is flat-out wrong.

-- 
Jarod Wilson
jarod-ajLrJawYSntWk0Htik3J/w at public.gmane.org